I don't think the pistons are worth enough to cover the cost of removing them Joel. If we could do it again we would not allow LSD's or some 1988 parts. At this point we just have too many of those.

YES the spirit is/should be "low cost equal racing". If we wind up needing a rule to keep it that way then I will vote the RMR votes that direction.

All of these cars are within the rules as written.

The cost to shave a head is minimal. Less than $100 not including the head gasket or labor.

While your at it have a quality valve job done. Your car will run better and you will be more competitive.

This is way less cost than expecting a large group of competitors to rebuild a new bottom end with 9.7pistons. You cannot simply swap pistons in a block and get a good seal. It might be OK for a street car but not a race car.

If you choose not to build to the rules then so be it. I am OK with that. But don't expect everyone to be like you.

My car was this way when I bought it. I should not have to de-tune my car because you don't want to spend money to make your car competitive.

My car was teched at Nationals and deemed legal.

OH Yeah, I forgot it's for sale too!!!!

The issue of 88 pistons is nonsense. We have a compression rule. An early engine can get exactly the same compression as one with 88 pistons and, therefore, make the same power.

As for the cost of shaving a head, it proably gets decked with a high quality valve job to make sure it is flat. The cost to shave a head for more compression, in that case, is nothing or almost nothing.

As for racing a junk yard engine, I would NEVER consider doing such a thing. I don't know anything about its condition and don't want to risk destroying an engine. At the very least, one would change all of the belts, right? So it is no longer a "junk yard" engine. I, for one, would want to check the bearings, rings, cylinder walls, head, oil pan, oil pickup tube and strengthen it, fix the number 2 rod oil issue, inprove the baffle/trap door issue, change the water pump, look at the oil pump and other things. That is the ONLY way to know that you will have a reliable engine.

The cost for me to go to an event, with entry fees, tires, gas, gas to get there, cost to stay for the weekend, food etc,ect,etc, can be $1,000 easy because I don't have tracks very close to me. Why would I ever risk running an unkown engine that could be destroyed beyone repair AND loose all of the other costs for a weekend? I WOULDN'T! The potential cost of doing that and loosing a motor would be close to the cost of having it rebuilt so that I KNOW it will be dependable and that is what I did with all three of my engines before I ever raced them.

Oh yes. For the record I can NOT rebuild an engine and would never even try. I know my limitations. That means I have to have someone that knows what they are doing build them. Let's be honest here, guys, how many of you have the knowledge to build a motor? Why would anyone critisize those of us that can't/won't do that? I watched while my oil pump was removed and resealed to stop an oil leak. Out came feeler gauges to make sure something was correct. I don't know and don't care to know. This is not a mechanics series where we all have to swear that we do all of the work on our own cars. Get real here.

My goodness, next we will be talking about guys that get driver coaching or bring guys to help as pit crew. Who wants to bitch about those next? If someone comes out with one or more pit guys and starts to win will we ban that?

I hope you all see where this is all going. I don't know who "they" are that complained. Chuck, Joe, who are these people that are complaining here? Are they mid pack drivers that want to think they can win or what?

I, for one, am more upset at the campagne to reduce the number of guys that went to Nationals in order to keep it below 30 to cut the Toyo money to the top five. As it turns out, that move hurt Dave Dirks by $2,000. I call that chicken s*$%! It hurt the 29 cars that went and it hurt 944-Spec in the eyes of the rest of the racing community and diminished our "showcase" event. If you all want to be upset at something, I think that is what you should be up in arms about. I know I am.

Jim

The case for an 88 piston motor has some merit. Read what Jon M posted again. Without an allowance for compensating cam timing, there is an advantage to an 88 piston motor. I don't know how significant or insignificant it is but it is there, at least in theory.

As far as racing with junkyard motors and rebuilding motors, I completely agree with Big Dog. I know, I know, Foxx and I agreeing! Alert the media!!!

Regarding some of the other points made here and in other related threads, I have an opinion but will opt out of adding to the noise of this thread. If I had a good solution (one both factions here would agree with) for this perceived problem, I would gladly contribute. Sadly, I don't.

All good points Big Dog. Racing is expensive enough that I am not going to show up with a junkyard motor of unknown condition and risk having to waste a weekend and scatter a motor.

There is a remedy to the 88 and non 88 pistons and it is relatively cheap. An offset cam woodruff key will correct the timing to stock and then it is game on again.

As far as the differences in year models and body styles there is probably something to that. The 924s does have a lower aero drag. I don't know how much or know if it makes any difference. It also has a narrower track, again not sure if there is any advantage to that.

I too had heard some rumblings reguarding the RMR not wanting to come and play with us.
If that is true then we need to get to the bottom of it. That will hurt this class more than any motor discrepency.

Anybody want to share any further information?

How much more HP does 10.5:1 compression make vs. 9.7:1 in a 944 engine? Anyone know definitively?

According to this calculator using 150HP as the baseline, you would gain 3 HP from the increased compression alone:

www.bgsoflex.com/cgi-bin/crchange.cgi?hp...r=9.7&newcr=10.5

I have no idea if that is accurate. Are we really all arguing over 3 HP?

What about guys currently running 88 model year cars? Do they have to tear down their engines and rebuild with lower compression ? ...or do you outlaw 88 chassis cars?

I think there is a mountain/mole hill thing going on here.

I have a big problem with someone cheating and making big power. I have no problem with a careful build to the rules that makes the maximum HP possible. Everyone should aspire to have the best prepared car and that is part of it. If you are doing the prep yourself, it doesn't cost much.

Where does this end? Do you outlaw alignment and corner balance? I'll bet there are some guys paying $500 between events for car setup and that is much more important than 5 HP. Do these guys have an advantage by spending money or can you learn to do it in your garage and offset that spending advantage with labor (that's what I do).

After Nationals, my rear toe was out 1/2" and my LR camber was near zero. My RF camber was excessive. Someone tagged my LR wheel in one of the qualifiers and I assume that is what deranged the rear suspension. The curbs are likely to blame for my RF. I didn't take the time to find a level pad and re-setup the car before the big race. I didn't dyno but I'd guess I'm about mid pack in the power struggle. Best lap in the race was 2:21.5, about the same as 3rd place times but I started in the back due to my own problems in the qualifiers with a mechanical DNF and a contact (sorry again Weston and Steve ). That was my first time at Miller so I was still learning the track. This is my long winded way of saying that a perfect setup with a good driver that knows the track should be able to crack 2:19's.

I don't see any issues from my perspective.